About your Search

20130211
20130219
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
, it was obama and jack lew and rob nabors who went to harry reid and said this is the solution but everyone has their fingerprint on this and it is everyone's -- the policy and it is law, what is important about it is, it is a governing travesty. the idea that you are going to go around and in random ways cut things and would be like a family that has to cut their budget, saying, let's cut the medicine that keeps the children alive. it is stupid. >> chris: kim, having said that it is stupid, what are the chances that we're actually going to reach march 1st and the sequester, the $85 billion in automatic cuts, will kick in and if it does, and if we begin to see, markets reacting and stuff, how does it play out with the president insisting there have to be tax hikes on the rich, and, the republicans saying, no, it all needs to come out of spending cuts? >> i think it is very likely we hit that day and it comes and the reason why is because, the republicans have been asking the white house to come up with some sort of alternative, which you actually prioritize, look forward, maybe, do something on
are the prospective candidates. there was a reason why todd akin won the primary. he won because harry reid went in and spent $2 million attacking him as a conservative during the republican primary. he said himself he has never voted for a tax increase. always been prolife. even supported a balanced budget amendment too conservative for missouri. the object was help nominate the weakest republican candidate possible to have is a chance. >> you are going to set your isself up as a bureau vetting the candidates. i mean -- >> no, no, no. >> the whole theory of republicanism is to let the local state or district decide. >> i think rand paul had it right. everybody has a chance. we believe in markets. let people do go in and partis it pate. the more people who participate the better off we are. the more we examine the quality of the candidates from top to bottom the more likely we end up with fewer kristine o'donnells and more rand pauls. >> chris: what do you make of the republican party decision to block temporarily but to block the nomination of a defense secretary for the first time in our histo
did because harry reid spent $2 million attacking him as a conservative during the republican primary. he said he never voted for a tax increase and always pro-life and supported a balanced budget amendment, and the object was help nominate the weakest republican candidate possible, so they'd have a chance -- >> but you set yourself up as a politbureau and the theory on republicanism is to lit the local state -- >> rand paul had a right and everybody has a chance in markets and let people go in and participate, the opposite of politbureau and the more who participate the better off we are and the more we examine the quality of the candidates the more likely we have fewer christine o'donnell's and more ra rand paul joos what do you think of the republican party's decision, temporarily, to block the nomination of the defense secretary for the first time in our history. >> why wouldn't they? in the end he's probably going to be confirmed, but in the meantime this is an opportunity -- the president thought in nominating chuck hagel he'd put him out there and rub republicans' noses in it a
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)